|
Post by nuuumannn on Feb 9, 2024 16:25:00 GMT 12
I think you need to re-read my post. I quoted from an Australian government audit published in 2014. (All)? Not the RNZAF. Our aircraft have not had the same logistical and functional issues as the Australians have had with the Taipans.
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Feb 9, 2024 18:22:38 GMT 12
I think you need to re-read my post. I quoted from an Australian government audit published in 2014. (All)? Not the RNZAF. Our aircraft have not had the same logistical and functional issues as the Australians have had with the Taipans. Yes, a ten year old report discussing issues of 18 to 22 years ago. If public domain information is accurate, all NH90 users have experienced issues of some kind sustaining the NH90. There have also been a lot of interesting threads and posts setting out the diferences in the missions and operating environments that the ADF and NATO forces train for, compared to the RNZAF, so its something of a well worn discussion.
|
|
|
Post by nuuumannn on Feb 10, 2024 12:32:08 GMT 12
I think you need to re-read my post. I quoted from an Australian government audit published in 2014. (All)? Not the RNZAF. Our aircraft have not had the same logistical and functional issues as the Australians have had with the Taipans. Yes, a ten year old report discussing issues of 18 to 22 years ago. If public domain information is accurate, all NH90 users have experienced issues of some kind sustaining the NH90. There have also been a lot of interesting threads and posts setting out the diferences in the missions and operating environments that the ADF and NATO forces train for, compared to the RNZAF, so its something of a well worn discussion. If that were indeed the point I was making, but again, you're putting words in my mouth. What I have written is not my opinion on the subject, it is not my stance on the way things unfolded, but a quote from the report released by the Australian government. I am glad that the Australian government has you guys to inform them that their own conclusions are irrelervant because of their age, I'm sure these matters had no relevance at all to the decision to retire the Taipans. Over the years I have covered the Taipan and NH-90 issues extensively in articles and what have you, and I have spoken to international industry experts who know a lot more on the subject than us here, so I am well versed in the NH-90 saga. Despite that I am certainly no expert in the subject, as I am sure many of you profess to be...
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Feb 12, 2024 14:12:45 GMT 12
There is a podcast called Ten Percent True which covers military operations. There is an episode with a former F-15e pilot, callsign "Starbaby", discussing the option of providing the Ukrainians with F-16's. He talked about the 10 years it took the Polish Airforce to become capable using their F-16's. He postulated the Ukrainians would face a similar challenge with their F-16's even taking into account the Ukraine is being offered A model Block 15 jets compared to Polish Block 52 jets. It's not a jump in a plane and go type scenario, its a change from a Russian style of flying, fighting and being to a NATO standard I suspect the Ukrainian's would have a similar such challenge with the NH-90's. Moving from ancient Mi-8s, Mi-17s to a modern, complicated helicopter with a spares problem seems like too big of an ask for a nation at war. I suspect a lot of former contractors who supported MRH90 operations with the ADF are now looking for alternative employment. A little angry and bitter perhaps, or possibly a little biased and lacking in objectivity? I love 10% true and the Starbaby segments in general. But a transport helicopter is not a F-16. The "it's too complicated for the argument has been used for everything from HIMARS, to ALCM's to ACTACMS to tanks... and every time it's proved false. And there is a lot (A real lot) of truth in that article.
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Feb 13, 2024 9:26:38 GMT 12
I suspect a lot of former contractors who supported MRH90 operations with the ADF are now looking for alternative employment. A little angry and bitter perhaps, or possibly a little biased and lacking in objectivity? I love 10% true and the Starbaby segments in general. But a transport helicopter is not a F-16. The "it's too complicated for the argument has been used for everything from HIMARS, to ALCM's to ACTACMS to tanks... and every time it's proved false. And there is a lot (A real lot) of truth in that article. Agreed. F-16s have been well and truly debugged, and LM is able to provide replacement parts for them. Tongue firmly in cheek of course.....
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Feb 13, 2024 14:06:48 GMT 12
I love 10% true and the Starbaby segments in general. But a transport helicopter is not a F-16. The "it's too complicated for the argument has been used for everything from HIMARS, to ALCM's to ACTACMS to tanks... and every time it's proved false. And there is a lot (A real lot) of truth in that article. Agreed. F-16s have been well and truly debugged, and LM is able to provide replacement parts for them. Tongue firmly in cheek of course..... 46 airframes gives plenty of spare parts if you only operate 20 or so. Not sure what you're getting with software. But clearly other operators have managed using the OEM software to track maintenance etc . I suspect issues like that are more down to the ADF stuffing with things they shouldn't. It amazing me how willing people are to give them a pass on this and Tiger and try and blame everything on the platforms.
|
|
|
Post by mcmaster on Feb 13, 2024 14:44:22 GMT 12
I don’t think most people in the know are giving the ADF a total pass on this and likewise not saying it’s 100% Airbus. It’s a regrettable circumstance with lots of politics in the mix. Hopefully deliveries of the Blackhawks can get rolling as well as training for pilots/ support crew completed quickly and we can move on. Looking forward to seeing those birds out of Holsworthy nearby.
Over my time the ADF and particularly the RAAF has incorporated whole new generations of platforms (and whole new capabilities) C17, Growler, Supers, F35, P8, wedgetail etc etc and generally it’s gone OK. Many countries would look to the ADF with envy I’d reckon. Will be very interesting to see where the RAN surface fleet review goes but that’s another story…
Edit..Defence Senate estimates tmow 14 Feb I think..should be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio on Feb 13, 2024 14:49:35 GMT 12
Leaked photo reveals dismantled Taipans waiting in warehouse for burial, reigniting frustrations not to send aircraft to Ukraine Article: link
|
|
|
Post by mcmaster on Feb 13, 2024 15:13:23 GMT 12
Leaked photo reveals dismantled Taipans waiting in warehouse for burial, reigniting frustrations not to send aircraft to Ukraine Article: linkLots of political noise on this issue and (same the fate of our old hornets) getting in way of sound decision making by ADF and Gov alike. Obviously trying to land the ol Labor weak on defence line.. Maybe I’m missing something but Germany the biggest provider of assistance to Ukraine after the US is sending 5 or so old Sea King helos (not sure if UK did similar) but Aus under pump by some to prepare these a/c we have decided to move on from which may not even be right for Ukraine given the arguments provided before. In other words it’s not like everyone is providing modern choppers and Aus is the odd one out saying no you can’t have them..
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Feb 13, 2024 16:17:12 GMT 12
I don’t think most people in the know are giving the ADF a total pass on this and likewise not saying it’s 100% Airbus. It’s a regrettable circumstance with lots of politics in the mix. Hopefully deliveries of the Blackhawks can get rolling as well as training for pilots/ support crew completed quickly and we can move on. Looking forward to seeing those birds out of Holsworthy nearby. Over my time the ADF and particularly the RAAF has incorporated whole new generations of platforms (and whole new capabilities) C17, Growler, Supers, F35, P8, wedgetail etc etc and generally it’s gone OK. Many countries would look to the ADF with envy I’d reckon. Will be very interesting to see where the RAN surface fleet review goes but that’s another story… Edit..Defence Senate estimates tmow 14 Feb I think..should be interesting. I think the ADF are leasing 7 more EC-135T2's from the UK to give their aircraft something to fly for the next 2-3 yrs until Blackhaawk comes online. Of course they can't carry any troops.
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Feb 13, 2024 17:12:13 GMT 12
I don’t think most people in the know are giving the ADF a total pass on this and likewise not saying it’s 100% Airbus. It’s a regrettable circumstance with lots of politics in the mix. Hopefully deliveries of the Blackhawks can get rolling as well as training for pilots/ support crew completed quickly and we can move on. Looking forward to seeing those birds out of Holsworthy nearby. Over my time the ADF and particularly the RAAF has incorporated whole new generations of platforms (and whole new capabilities) C17, Growler, Supers, F35, P8, wedgetail etc etc and generally it’s gone OK. Many countries would look to the ADF with envy I’d reckon. Will be very interesting to see where the RAN surface fleet review goes but that’s another story… Edit..Defence Senate estimates tmow 14 Feb I think..should be interesting. When you've seen a large number of successful programs, it's easier to know when to walk away from those that don't deliver, and to avoid getting caught in the trap of wanting to make something work "at any cost."
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Feb 13, 2024 20:41:54 GMT 12
All the "successful" programs listed above were US FMS purchases. There in itself is a lesson.
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Feb 13, 2024 22:00:11 GMT 12
All the "successful" programs listed above were US FMS purchases. There in itself is a lesson. E-7 was developed and delivered under a contract between Boeing and CoA, as were the RAN's initial Seahawk fleet with Sikorsky. The initial Blackhawks were a CoA - Sikorsky contract hence the S.70 designation. The Hawk LIF was delivered under a contract with BAE and would be considered successful by most.
|
|
|
Post by 30sqnatc on Feb 13, 2024 23:17:35 GMT 12
Wedgetail FMS - really.
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Feb 14, 2024 11:20:32 GMT 12
Fair enough, maybe I should have said non-Airbus!
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Feb 14, 2024 14:06:51 GMT 12
Fair enough, maybe I should have said non-Airbus! KC-30 turned out well (eventually ) And Airbus civil products seem to be having less issues than Boeing at the moment.
|
|
chrisr
Squadron Leader
Posts: 102
|
Post by chrisr on Feb 14, 2024 18:04:30 GMT 12
Chinook's, PC-21 and MH-60R's would count as successful too.
Those programs were an off the shelf product too (maybe not the Wedgetail since it was new tech). No changes were made to those airframes or their systems for the Australian Defence Force.
The MRH-90, SH-2G, Tiger all had variations from the off the shelf product and got scrapped.
Reminds me of the RAF's Chinook HC3 debacle. The RAF requested software on the aircraft which deviated so much from the original specs that the aircraft were unflyable. The aircraft were stored for 8 years before eventually flying in with a older software package.
|
|
|
Post by mcmaster on Feb 14, 2024 19:37:18 GMT 12
The RAAF’s software integration of the British ASRAAM missile into the Hornet fleet could be seen as a success if expensive. Same with the Israeli EL-8222 jammers. The local Echidna program not so successful and luckily canned before pushing ahead at any cost..As the goal of more indigenous capability and independence grows likely there will be more failures but hopefully greater success.
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Feb 14, 2024 20:42:10 GMT 12
Chinook's, PC-21 and MH-60R's would count as successful too. Those programs were an off the shelf product too (maybe not the Wedgetail since it was new tech). No changes were made to those airframes or their systems for the Australian Defence Force. The MRH-90, SH-2G, Tiger all had variations from the off the shelf product and got scrapped.Reminds me of the RAF's Chinook HC3 debacle. The RAF requested software on the aircraft which deviated so much from the original specs that the aircraft were unflyable. The aircraft were stored for 8 years before eventually flying in with a older software package. ADF MRH90s (NH90) were actually pretty much stock standard German Army spec. It's the RNZAF that operates a modified variant. Tiger. That whole program financially imploded due to the small number of airframes eventually bought by France and Germany (nowhere near the 200 each originally planned). Germany recently decided to retire their Tigers early and replace them with H145Ms, which pretty much validates the ADF's decision. Soon the entire Tiger fleet will consist of about 90 aircraft operate by France and Spain. Good luck to them with that.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Feb 15, 2024 14:07:22 GMT 12
Chinook's, PC-21 and MH-60R's would count as successful too. Those programs were an off the shelf product too (maybe not the Wedgetail since it was new tech). No changes were made to those airframes or their systems for the Australian Defence Force. The MRH-90, SH-2G, Tiger all had variations from the off the shelf product and got scrapped.Reminds me of the RAF's Chinook HC3 debacle. The RAF requested software on the aircraft which deviated so much from the original specs that the aircraft were unflyable. The aircraft were stored for 8 years before eventually flying in with a older software package. ADF MRH90s (NH90) were actually pretty much stock standard German Army spec. It's the RNZAF that operates a modified variant. Tiger. That whole program financially imploded due to the small number of airframes eventually bought by France and Germany (nowhere near the 200 each originally planned). Germany recently decided to retire their Tigers early and replace them with H145Ms, which pretty much validates the ADF's decision. Soon the entire Tiger fleet will consist of about 90 aircraft operate by France and Spain. Good luck to them with that. H145M is a poor replacement for Tiger if you want go into combat. That said helicopters in general are proving to be incredibly vulnerable when they have to go near any decent proper air defences. hence cancellation of the US Army FARA aircraft and JASDF not replacing their Apaches. Whilst the Australian Army seem to be heading on with the 5 billion Apache. I wonder how many uncrewed aircraft we could get with that money. .
|
|